V. I. Lenin

Remarks on Ryazanov’s Article “Two Truths”{5}

Written:Written in September-October 1901Published:First published in 1959 in Vol. 5 of the Fifth Russian edition of theCollected Works.

      Printed from the original.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Progress Publishers,1977,

      Moscow,Volume 41,

      pages36.2-38.1.Translated:Yuri SdobnikovTranscription\Markup:R. CymbalaCopyleft:V. I. Lenin Internet Archive (www.marxists.org)
      © 2004

      Permission is granted to copy and/or distribute this document under the
      terms of theGNU Free Documentation License.

1.The author regards as being of primary importance what Marx said
(about the two ways) inexceptionalcircumstances and in virtually
conditional
terms.{6}However, the author distorts the fact, creating the impression
that it was Marx himself who actuallyraisedthe question of the
two ways.

7.“Laughter” at the men of the 70s (facing history) showsn o t“only an absolute incapacity for taking the historical standpoint”, it is
also evidence of theoreticaldisparagementof the men of the 70s,
as compared with those of the 40s and 60s.

7a.The author touches up Mikhailovsky by emphasising that the latter
had opposed V.V., but failing to say that he had gone along with V.V. very
much more frequently and at greater length.

8.This is a glaring untruth: blaming Mikhailovsky for thet r a g i cdemise of theNarodnaya Volyaand the “going
among the people”. The article is devoted to Mikhailovsky, whose
			      Untergang{1}is purelyp e r s \"o n l i c h e r,{2}and whose fate contains a kopek’s worth of the “tragic” and a ruble’s
worth of the comic.

9.It isstupidto confuse thedressing-downof
Mikhailovsky with the “shovelling of dirt on the generation of the
revolutionary socialists of the 70s”.

9.NB “refuses” to follow the reflection of the revolutionary
majority in legal writings.

9-10.All the “Gekreuzigte und

			     Verbannte”{3}??(of the 70s)?lend an avid ear to the voice of the ignoramus.

13.“Social questions give way to personal ones”

(a n dd o w n

t o

t h e

e n d

o f

t h e

p a g eNB).

|??|(A downright Pisarev approach.)

15....(Pisarev) “A buoyant sermon of personal happiness”” ” ” of “individualistic

|??|ideals”.

18.” ”  “immersed in matters of personal self-improvement”.

24-25.(§ III) A characteristic of the utopian socialism of therevolutionaries(of the 70s), which is confused with the
Mikhailovsky trend.

28-29.Mikhailovsky frequently “sacrificed” one of the truths.B u twe are not interested in the “latest phase” of his activity. We are
concerned with Mikhailovsky only as one who has given expression to a
definite trend among theyoung peopleof the 70s and 80s.

31.What are the “limits” set “by nature to the mind”?  (Theory of
cognition.)

29–35.Exposition of the “system of truth”.

35....This system “is an effort to discover the social element in
reality...” which “would be concerned in realising the ideal”.

41.From the dispute with Yuzov and Co. (a dry rehash), a leap over to
Yakovenko (1888).

46–48.Pendant{4}==T k a c h a v.FurtherAxelrodand transition to Social-Democrats.The whole exposition is dull and has little bearing on the “two
foregoing” and onM i k h a i l o v s k y.

AndN. —on (52)!!—with Mikhailovsky’s conclusions from his work
(53).

§ V,from p. 57 to p. 77 (78–80 about the “critics”)—the
birth of Marxism. It’s all deadly dull; only on p. 82 does he return to the

“o l d

t r u t h”.

—85—We reject the division of the world into noumena and
phenomena.{7}Notes{1}Downfall.—Ed.{2}Personal.—Ed.{3}“The crucified and the exiled”.—Ed.{4}Counterpart.—Ed.{5}Lenin’s remarks en the article by D. B. Ryazanov “Two Truths”,
written in the summer of 1901 for the magazineZarya. The article
was rejected by the editors and was not published in the magazine.Thepages indicated by Lenin are those of Ryazanov’s MS., which he
submitted to theZaryaEditorial Board.

p. 36{6}See Marx and Engels,Selected Correspondence, “Letter to the
Editorial Board ofOtechestvenniye Zapiski, November 1877”,
Moscow, 1965, pp. 311–13.

p. 36{7}Noumena and phenomena—opposite concepts in Kant’s idealistic
philosophy.Kantheld a noumenon to be an incognisable thing in itself, which
existed independently of man’s consciousness and was beyond his grasp. A
phenomenon existed only in the mind and was an object of cognition.Thisantithesis between noumena and phenomena, which is one of the main
p repositions of Kant’s subjective idealist epistemology, is used by the
ideologists of imperialism and revisionists in their fight against
materialism.Dialecticalmaterialism rejected this antithesis and proved that Kant’s
theory is wrong.

p. 38

Notes{1}Downfall.—Ed.{2}Personal.—Ed.{3}“The crucified and the exiled”.—Ed.{4}Counterpart.—Ed.{5}Lenin’s remarks en the article by D. B. Ryazanov “Two Truths”,
written in the summer of 1901 for the magazineZarya. The article
was rejected by the editors and was not published in the magazine.Thepages indicated by Lenin are those of Ryazanov’s MS., which he
submitted to theZaryaEditorial Board.

p. 36{6}See Marx and Engels,Selected Correspondence, “Letter to the
Editorial Board ofOtechestvenniye Zapiski, November 1877”,
Moscow, 1965, pp. 311–13.

p. 36{7}Noumena and phenomena—opposite concepts in Kant’s idealistic
philosophy.Kantheld a noumenon to be an incognisable thing in itself, which
existed independently of man’s consciousness and was beyond his grasp. A
phenomenon existed only in the mind and was an object of cognition.Thisantithesis between noumena and phenomena, which is one of the main
p repositions of Kant’s subjective idealist epistemology, is used by the
ideologists of imperialism and revisionists in their fight against
materialism.Dialecticalmaterialism rejected this antithesis and proved that Kant’s
theory is wrong.

p. 38

{1}Downfall.—Ed.

{2}Personal.—Ed.

{3}“The crucified and the exiled”.—Ed.

{4}Counterpart.—Ed.

{5}Lenin’s remarks en the article by D. B. Ryazanov “Two Truths”,
written in the summer of 1901 for the magazineZarya. The article
was rejected by the editors and was not published in the magazine.

Thepages indicated by Lenin are those of Ryazanov’s MS., which he
submitted to theZaryaEditorial Board.

p. 36

{6}See Marx and Engels,Selected Correspondence, “Letter to the
Editorial Board ofOtechestvenniye Zapiski, November 1877”,
Moscow, 1965, pp. 311–13.

p. 36

{7}Noumena and phenomena—opposite concepts in Kant’s idealistic
philosophy.

Kantheld a noumenon to be an incognisable thing in itself, which
existed independently of man’s consciousness and was beyond his grasp. A
phenomenon existed only in the mind and was an object of cognition.

Thisantithesis between noumena and phenomena, which is one of the main
p repositions of Kant’s subjective idealist epistemology, is used by the
ideologists of imperialism and revisionists in their fight against
materialism.

Dialecticalmaterialism rejected this antithesis and proved that Kant’s
theory is wrong.

p. 38